[aikaarska]

Ha! Ha! I thought those were your images since the were posted by you in response to doubts about your claims, particularly since you seem to have all the answers about their intent. BTW...all of the group for which we have the DNG shared the same LV and all are about 2/3 stop underexposed..

;-) Ok, YOU thought so. I never claimed they were my files. These are OP's (MJKoski / maffer) files. ...And I know a lot about matter, because we've been discussing a lot of this there i finnish photography site (digicamera.net)...

[Kunzite]

Do you also know why I can't replicate those findings?

[MJKoski]

Here are the two DNG files (image has focus in dead center, target is a blanket of sheep fur, the rabbit was not available anymore and has decomposed away quite badly): 2018-04-17.7z - Google Drive

That series which I posted on the finnish forum was another case which had nothing to do with ISO100 pushed to ISO800.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

That series which I posted on the finnish forum was another case which had nothing to do with ISO100 pushed to ISO800.

After looking at the Raw file I can see that any detail above a certain size has some NR done to it in the iso 800 shot I would even say that there is some sharping being done to smaller detail also in that iso 800 shot.

I think we are taking notice to this as the K1 from what I have seen from it has no NR done to it at any iso setting

[aikaarska]

Here are the two DNG files (image has focus in dead center, target is a blanket of sheep fur, the rabbit was not available anymore and has decomposed away quite badly): 2018-04-17.7z - Google Drive

That series which I posted on the finnish forum was another case which had nothing to do with ISO100 pushed to ISO800.

Thank you for those DNGs... But are these same files from which you did 100% sample crops here, in finnish forum?

Digicamera.net - Valokuvausfoorumi ? katso viestiketjua - Pentax K-1

What is your own conclusion now?

[Kunzite]

Thank you.
I opened the two files in Silkypix, and I could see the smoothing right away... that is, until I remembered to disable it from Silkipix

Now it's the same story, there are slight differences in noise, but I can see no smoothing. I'm attaching crops of these images (my bad, ISO 100 has slightly higher sharpening but it doesn't make any difference)

[stevebrot]

Here are the two DNG files (image has focus in dead center, target is a blanket of sheep fur, the rabbit was not available anymore and has decomposed away quite badly): 2018-04-17.7z - Google Drive

That series which I posted on the finnish forum was another case which had nothing to do with ISO100 pushed to ISO800.

Thanks! These are much appreciated. Too bad about the rabbit.


Steve

[BigMackCam]

Thank you.
I opened the two files in Silkypix, and I could see the smoothing right away... that is, until I remembered to disable it from Silkipix

Now it's the same story, there are slight differences in noise, but I can see no smoothing. I'm attaching crops of these images (my bad, ISO 100 has slightly higher sharpening but it doesn't make any difference)

I do actually see what the OP's talking about. Find the "O-shape" of fur, two thirds up on the right hand side of the image, and closely examine both photos. The top photo (ISO 100 pushed) shows just a tiny bit more detail, and I don't think that's the illusion that greater noise / graininess sometimes produces (although it could be). I genuinely can see a tiny bit more detail in the top photo. That said, it is extremely minor. For me personally, this wouldn't be concerning in the slightest, but that's just me

[Kunzite]

IMO it's just noise giving the impression of detail. Actually that tiny bit of noise does obscure some detail, in the pushed ISO 100 shot.

[Rico]

There is no "Adobe Standard" yet for the K-1II. The example images have been from the embedded profile. It might be interesting to compare the embedded profile for the K-1 with that from the K-1II. There is a tool (dcpTool) that does extraction as well as decompile/compile of embedded and file-based (.dcp files) profiles for editing. Of interest to this discussion are provisions to make profiles invariate such that dynamic curve adjustments are not made in response to changes of the "exposure" or "brightness" sliders.

Introduction


Steve

If the file is DNG then in ACR you should be able to switch between Camera Profiles. I prefer the embedded profile.

[BigMackCam]

IMO it's just noise giving the impression of detail.

You could be right, or I could. The mere fact that I'm unsure which of us is right is a good measurement of the significance

This is interesting, though. I still look forward to side-by-side shots from the K-1 and K-1II so we can compare any differences that might exist...

[aikaarska]

This is interesting, though. I still look forward to side-by-side shots from the K-1 and K-1II so we can compare any differences that might exist...

+1

Yep, that comparison will solve this matter. And hopefully we will also get PEF (Adobe) support by then.

[Kunzite]

You could be right, or I could. The mere fact that I'm unsure which of us is right is a good measurement of the significance

This is interesting, though. I still look forward to side-by-side shots from the K-1 and K-1II so we can compare any differences that might exist...

Indeed. If it's well within measuring error, it's a non-issue.
If it was like in the JPEGs posted by the OP, that could've been a reason not to make the update - and shout a bit at Pentax

I'm looking forward to a K-1 vs K-1 II comparison, too.

Perhaps we should avoid Adobe products...

[BigMackCam]

Perhaps we should avoid Adobe products...

I hate myself for saying this, but I still haven't completely switched over to Darktable. The colour noise reduction in Lightroom 6 is sooo good even at high ISO settings, and Darktable doesn't allow manual cushion distortion correction. Both of these are quite a big deal for me, and if it weren't for that, I would love to retire Lightroom

[Kunzite]

I'm saying, for such comparisons - as it seems that's the reason for the OP's dissatisfaction.

I can't use a Lightroom trial on my PC to check that. I will call myself a Silkypix user, as soon as I figure out how to use it - but at least I could find and disable all NR types, including one called "smoothing" which, at its default setting, did exactly what the OP observed.